Commentaries, Global Warming, Opinions   Cover   •   Commentary   •   Books & Reviews   •   Climate Change   •   Site Links   •   Feedback
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
WEBCommentary Contributor
Author:  Michael J. Gaynor
Bio: Michael J. Gaynor
Date:  September 20, 2008
Print article - Printer friendly version

Email article link to friend(s) - Email a link to this article to friends

Facebook - Facebook

Topic category:  Other/General

Will There Be a Reverse Bradley Effect?

Team Obama’s excuse for losing, or not winning bigger, as the case may be, will be white racism, of course.

Wikipedia:

“The term Bradley effect... refers to a frequently observed discrepancy between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor's race despite being ahead in voter polls, the Bradley effect refers to a tendency on the part of white voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a Black candidate, when, on election day, they vote for his/her white opponent.

“One theory for the Bradley effect is that some white voters give inaccurate polling responses for fear that, by stating their true preference, they will appear to the pollster to be racially prejudiced. The reluctance to give accurate polling answers has sometimes extended to post-election exit polls as well. The race of the pollster conducting the interview may be a factor into voters' answers. Some pollsters believe that they do not receive deliberately false answers from white voters. The Bradley effect, these pollsters believe, is caused by pollsters' failure to account for general political leanings among voters who are undecided between Democrats and Republicans.”

Team Obama’s excuse for losing, or not winning bigger, as the case may be, will be white racism, of course.

It won’t be that Obama is too liberal, too inexperienced, too elitist, too arrogant or too political.

It won’t be that McCain is a war hero and Obama is a war zero.

It won’t be that McCain gave more than twenty years of his life to serving his country in the military and Obama never gave a minute of his life for military service, or service in the Peace Corps, or service in the domestic Peace Corps.

It won’t be that McCain has big legislative accomplishments and Obama doesn’t.

It won’t be because McCain picked pro-lifer Sarah Palin as his vice presidential nominee and Obama rejected Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in favor of Senator Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., a renegade Catholic who rejects his Church’s teachings.

Obama and his supporters in and out of the media are playing the race card shamelessly.

CNN's Jack Cafferty:

“The differences between Barack Obama and John McCain couldn't be more well-defined. Obama wants to change Washington. McCain is a part of Washington and a part of the Bush legacy. Yet the polls remain close. Doesn't make sense…unless it's race.”

The Youngstown Vindicator:

“'Race — that’s the only reason people in the Valley won’t vote for him,’ said state Rep. Thomas Letson of Warren, D-64th, about Barack Obama, his party’s presidential nominee. ‘There are 1,000 reasons to vote for Obama and one reason why you won’t — race.’

"'Staunch Republicans’ who make up 35 percent to 40 percent of the population would never vote for a Democrat regardless of race, Letson said.

“It is the independents, the ‘swing voters’ and Democrats who are or will support Republican John McCain who are the ‘racists,’ Letson and state Rep. Robert F. Hagan of Youngstown, D-60th, said.”

Dick Meyer, NPR:

“Similarly, many people felt McCain's famous ad that called Obama a celebrity like Paris Hilton was subliminally racist, subtly playing on racist impulses that fear black men with white women, or that preyed on the idea that black men succeed only in celebrity arenas like sports and music.”

Obama surrogate, Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius:

"I think the notion that, 'By the way, have any of you noticed that Barack Obama is part African-American?' That may be a factor. All of the code language, all that doesn't show up in polls, and that may be a factor for some people."

Meanwhile, polls are showing that black voters favor Obama over McCain by about 94% to 1%.

But, is there a reverse Bradley effect?

Are blacks saying they will vote for Obama because it seems to be the politically correct thing to say, but planning to vote the other way?

We will find out on or soon after Election Day.

Will Obama win more votes because he is black than McCain will lose because he is white?

In the names of affirmative action and political correctness, would that be considered alright?

Will Obama lose more votes because he is black than McCain will win because he is white?

Is racial identification voting ok for blacks, but not whites?

The truth is that those who say yes have ascended the hypocrisy heights.

Michael J. Gaynor

Send email feedback to Michael J. Gaynor


Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.

Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.

The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.

Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.

Gaynor's email address is gaynormike@aol.com.


Read other commentaries by Michael J. Gaynor.

Copyright © 2008 by Michael J. Gaynor
All Rights Reserved.

[ Back ]


© 2004-2017 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved